Do you happen to have them saying this handy, i am trying to look up them saying anything at all about them and I am not having any luck.
1 Like
This is another part of the argument that you donât understand. If a person has permission to take the items, what happens to them is irrelevant.
Sure they do, player logs can be altered, in game logs cannot.
Yah most definitely, both example are very extreme and demonstrate a lack of trust if you have to go to such lengths.
2 Likes
wowwiki Guild_bank
âBlizzard-supported guild banks were introduced with [patch 2.3] to help reduce player-created guild banks, which were prone to violations due to account sharingâ
So, if Johnny has access to the guild bank, he can just take all the devilsaur leather and sell it to find his epic mount and that is OK. The fact that he just âstoleâ all the leather to fund his epic mount is irrelevant?
If the GM was stupid enough to not set proper permissions, itâs the GMâs fault.
1 Like
Another thought:
Guilds are built on trust. Whoâs going to steal all that devilsaur leather KNOWING itâs logged, KNOWING itâs for the guild, and think theyâre going raiding next Saturday?
3 Likes
Not an official Blizzard statement, is it?
Can you find an official Blizzard quote that says otherwise?
I cannot find it now, but it was linked in at least a few of the various guild bank threads. Ironically that statement was linked by those who wanted to claim that guild banks were added for security when the statement says nothing of the sort.
to be fair the only 2 i ever found were just generic tweets about it, or quotes, you would have to somehow do a search of Blue posts and tweets to see if anyone ever asked them specifically.
One of the pro guild bank advocates, I cannot remember which one, linked an article previewing the upcoming patch 2.3 with an interview of one of the devs.
I will paraphrase, but that dev said that Blizzard knew that guilds were using guild bank alts ad had decided to implement guild banks because they were more convenient than guild bank alts. They said nothing about security, account sharing, reduced tickets, etc.
Iâve searched and have not found the article or the link. So far the closest I can find is:
The last post on that page mentions that article and interview as well as what was said.
it was Starman in the one I found that had the 2 quotes I am talking about, but like I said, Iâm sure someone has asked them over the years about it specifically, or even back then, they had spurts where they talked to us and where they didnât.
It may very well have been Starman. I cannot remember.
I know that Starman has tried several times to use that same third party, unsubstantiated claim as proof that guild banks were added for âsecurityâ.
I also know that whoever linked the article was ultimately sorry that they did, since the article and interview did specifically mention that guild banks were added because they were more convenient than guild banks and for the convenience they provided, but never once mentioned security, account sharing, reduced tickets, etc.
but that does not mean that those were also not considerations either, i am quite sure that in 15 years, well 13 , that no one ever asked them that, the 2 quotes I read were very brief little blurbs that seemed very light on much of anything.
It is all moot anyway, though if you donât believe Blizzard now it may not be, though to me GBs are up there with flight, sure they would be great, but there are versions where both exist and as I have said many times before, I am not playing Classic to pet battle or fly.
You are correct that it does not mean that other factors were not considered.
What is fact, though, is that those who claim that guild banks were added for âsecurityâ have thus far not only been unable to produce any official Blizzard statement substantiate that claim, but the only official statement they provided only mentions the convenience that guild banks bring as a factor for their addition.
Fesz, in terms of the logs the big difference is this. One of the logs can be made to lie, one cannot.
On top of that itâs already been proven that guild bank alts can cause security risks and violations of the ToS.
Guild bank alts CAN be a security issue, a scam issue, a violation of ToS issue, and more issues from it that guild banks FIX in many ways when compared to the guild bank alt system.
Deny it all you want but even if only 1% of people abuse guild bank alts thatâs still a lot of people causing harm/potential security risk.
Letâs say classic gets 1 million players with 100,000 guilds (100 players per guild), thatâs still 10 guilds having issues because of guild bank alts, wiether it be scams, security, exc. That causes unneeded drama, CS tickets and work load for blizzard to try and soirt out a multitude of messes.
From a game designers and company stand point guild banks is the better system in every way, both for the players and the CS team. And we know, âit wasnât in vanillaâ but wanna know what also wasnât part of vanilla? Having an internet speed faster than a snale. And thatâs a QoL change right there! So if your so set on living in 2004-2006 again, better downgrade your internet back to the phone line.
Edit, fixed an accidental double 0, bit the point still remains, with 10 guilds having issues thatâs 1000 people having issues because of guild bank alts
3 Likes
When people feel the need to make ridiculous strawman arguments, itâs pretty obvious they have no legitimate line of reasoning.
Your math is as faulty as your attempts to justify this one of your numerous desired non vanilla QOL convenience changes. 100,000 guilds with 100 members each would be 10 million players, even if every player were in a guild.
Letâs pretend that every player will be in a guild, though and say that classic gets 1 million players with 10,000 guilds (100 players per guild). Letâs say that each guild gives only half their members access to the guild bank. Thatâs still 500,000 potential thieves, far more than there would be even if every one of those guilds had 10, or even 20, officers maintaining a guild bank alt.
Add to that the fact that even if someone âstoleâ from a guild bank, they had permission to take those items and a GM will be unlikely to get involved in a âguild bank theftâ, let alone restore any items unless they are overstepping their authority. That does not even address the number of tickets that still existed far after guild banks were added.
I thought your stance was that the slippery slope was a fallacy. Yet, here you go again, proving that you are unable to even keep yourself off that slippery slope.
âFaster internet speeds are a QOL that was not in vanilla, so why not add the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks?â
What is there to lie about? Once the item is given to the player. Its theirs to do with as they please.
Wasnât that your argument about donating to guild bank alts?
Also. Yes. Lie.
Just like officers can fudge those out of game logs you keep praising.
Yes. Those officers can lie.
This is what we told you 14 threads ago.
That is when you were on the trust kick.
Now here we are.
Now youâre grasping at straws about what they do with the item once it is distributed to them? LOL
2 Likes